Syria at the (bad) turning poing

The New York Times reports that the Al-Assad dictatorship is at the point of defeating the democrats by  isolating cities and then by military killing and criminal arrests.  Accord:  Bloomberg, BBC News, others.  We continue to mull over what to do.

Cities mentioned in the Times article:

HOMS:

[This is not the Mormon Tabernacle]

[This is not the Aloha Tower]

[These buildings are not in Honolulu, but look like it]

BANIYAS

[This is not a Koolau waterfall.]

[These are not Texas bluebonnets]

This is not a street in Kailua-Kona, Hawaii]

These are Alewife farmers, the same clan as Al- Assad, and living in that part of the north of Syria where most Alewives live.  This is not a picture of Kahaluu farmers, not even when we had farmers in Kahaluu, but it might have been.  You can see little Ula Kawelo on the right, perhaps.

This is not Campbell Industrial Park

This is not Tamarind Square, Oahu

This is not a view of Pearl Harbor from our home up Wilihemhna.

W can's even get folks together for A Gay Pride Parade.

I would like for these folks, and all folks, to have freedom, too.

DARA'A

You'll find blond hair and blue eyes in Pashtunistan, too.  Damn Druids went everywhere, dropping seed as they went along.

Images from Dara'a do not remind me of home.   The images are grim.  The situation is grim. 

[And editorial comment]

Images of Syria remind me of Texas and Hawaii.  I think I would like the folks living there.  I fear that Syria will go the way of Bahrain, repression and death all around, and now democracy defeated.   And there seems to be nothing we can do in either country, though we are by far the most powerful nation on earth.  Why is he Giant of the World powerless to help democratic revolutions?  I'm trying to figure that out.  I hear the explanations; I remain unconvinced by them.  Help, please.

I shouldn't. I really shouldn't. But . . .

Well, I guess a little tiny gleam of glee . . . .

And to LOL, look at Tim's contribution:

God Bless America!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxVdU2eVYSg 

Why Libya and not Syria, and wither Hamas

In Libya, the government fires on its citizens, and drones from the West attack.

In Syria, more than 700 citizens have been shot dead by fire into crowds, and then fire at those trying to rescue the wounded.  Washington mulls its response.

I'm confused.  Libya was hailed as a friend of the West.  From the US, Republicans and Democrats alike praised Qaddafi, calling him our friend.

Syria, on the other hand, is aligned with Iran, supports Hezbo Allah and, until a few days ago, financially supported Hamas, said to be our enemy.

Why the different treatment?

The Washington Post today in an editorial pretending to be a news article, predicts chaos if the al-Assad government falls.  Why such a concern?  The Ba'ath Party has been in power 41 years.  Judging from the news reports, the people protesting in Syria are democrats, seeking freedom and work, after 41 years of a dictatorship that keeps Syria's wealth for its close supporters.  Why are we so afraid of the fall of the present government?

Meanwhile, Hamas has broken with Syria, creating more fear in Israel.  Hamas turned to the Arab nations for support, but only Qatar will accept it.

Images, from Reuters, unpleasant, of Syrian attacks on its citizens:

:

The Death of Ben Laden

Contrarian, as usual.  Lao Tse:

Now arms, however beautiful, are instruments of evil omen,

hateful, it may be said, to all creatures. Therefore they who have

the Tao do not like to employ them.

The superior man ordinarily considers the left hand the most

honourable place, but in time of war the right hand. Those sharp

weapons are instruments of evil omen, and not the instruments of the

superior man;--he uses them only on the compulsion of necessity. Calm

and repose are what he prizes; victory (by force of arms) is to him

undesirable. To consider this desirable would be to delight in the

slaughter of men; and he who delights in the slaughter of men cannot

get his will in the kingdom.

On occasions of festivity to be on the left hand is the prized

position; on occasions of mourning, the right hand. The second in

command of the army has his place on the left; the general commanding

in chief has his on the right;--his place, that is, is assigned to him

as in the rites of mourning. He who has killed multitudes of men

should weep for them with the bitterest grief; and the victor in

battle has his place (rightly) according to those rites.

At least Obama didn't crow -- or didn't crow too much. . . .

Some of our citizens did, being unaware of  hubris:

At least one person made a thoughtful analysis and a cautionary tale of hubris.  I urge you to read this post.  I like how the author thinks.

Ah well.  I like Jimmy Carter.